Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

We used the following idea: first get a set of Hamel basis for $\mathbb{R}$, secondly, divide it into two parts such that one set of the Hamel basis forms a group, the other one is just the former one with a representative element added. However, it's hard to prove the existence of the representative and the construction of the division is also ambigious.

Thanks for your attention.

share|improve this question
    
Every non-zero element of $\Bbb R$ generates an infinite subgroup; the only finite subgroup is the trivial one. –  Brian M. Scott Mar 21 '13 at 16:51
6  
$2x=0\iff x=0$. –  anon Mar 21 '13 at 17:04
1  
Anon's comment is, in fact, the complete answer, yet I wonder why would you want to mess with Hamel basis and stuff...? –  DonAntonio Mar 21 '13 at 17:10
3  
@DonAntonio Messing with Hamel bases and the description makes it seem like maybe the aim is actually to find a subgroup of index $2$ rather than order $2$. I'll leave it up to the OP to clarify if this is the case though. –  Tobias Kildetoft Mar 21 '13 at 17:16
    
Do you mean 'index' instead of 'order'? Also why would you want to deal with division? –  Simon Markett Mar 21 '13 at 17:18
show 1 more comment

1 Answer

up vote 6 down vote accepted

No. There are no nontrivial elements in $\mathbb{R}$ with finite order.

If you're looking for a subgroup of index 2, you're not going to have much luck either. If $H$ has index $2$ in $\mathbb{R}$, then $\mathbb{R}/H$ is a group of order $2$, so for any $r\in \mathbb{R}$, $2(rH)=(2r)H=H$. But then we can simply take $r=s/2$ given any $s\in \mathbb{R}$ and conclude that $sH=H$. Thus we have $\mathbb{R}\subseteq H$, a contradiction.

If you're into generalizations, by the way, note that we may easily adapt the above to prove that there are no subgroups of finite index in $\mathbb{R}$ at all (or, more generally, in any the additive group of any field of characteristic $0$). (Even more generally, fixing an $n\in \mathbb{N}$, no group with the property that $\forall g\in G \exists h\in G : h^n=g$ may have a subgroup of index $n$; in particular, no ring in which $n\in \mathbb{N}$ is a unit may have an additive subgroup of index $n$.)

share|improve this answer
1  
Any divisible group cannot have proper subgroups of finite index. Now what are these groups? Well, (abelian) groups in which you can divide! Formally, these are groups $G$ in which for every positive integer $n$ and every $g \in G$, there exists an $x \in G$ such that $nx = g$. –  Nicky Hekster Mar 21 '13 at 20:40
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.